I don't know that we have to conjure the Easter Bunny to imagine that a new, young leader might want to head in a new direction. But all those old guys with the funny hats who keep him surrounded suggest that this job calls for Bugs Bunny, at the least.

The young revolutionaries of the Department of Statistics and Truth for the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, under the glorious guidance of the Brilliant Comrade and the benevolent influence of the late Dear Leader, of course.

What the TE article did not mention is that the us and south korea are having joint military exercises three in a row, with the third one starting on or just before the leap day that involves some 200,000 troops, warships, subs and fighters, right on the back of north korea, that is to last for more than a month to come.

The Kims are hilarious, with their Micky Mouse hats, Michael Jordan jerseys, and nuclear weapons in hand all at the same time. This recent development is of course just another cycle in the charade of NK-USA diplomatic relations. Expect a news story of deteriorating relations in a few months, and then another news story about rebuilding relations a few months after that.
.
The Kims have managed to take playground logic to govern a soon-to-be nuclear-armed (NK probably does not have deployable nukes yet) country of 20+ million. Very funny indeed....

I assume that the official reason is that rice can easily be diverted by the military and the government. A few lighter sacks here or there can easily be missed. Harder to do that with prepackaged biscuits.

Also, I'm assuming these are not the best-tasting biscuits. Rice would be much more palatable.

Its the US's way of giving food and averting starvation without making the Koreans happy. There is a deliberate dose of spite in that calculation along with the aforementioned fact that rice could easily go straight to the military unnoticed.

Rice and grain can be stored and last for quite a bit, making it likely that the two could be horded by the army. Biscuits expire more quickly, and are therefore, at least in theory, more likely to make it into the hands of the average starving N. Korean.

It is a sign of desperation that food is the ultimate goal of negotiation.

The Korean Winter has been especially cold and long.

Even Africa has conquered famine...the newest epidemic in Africa is obesity.

And every country touching China has been experiencing near double digit growth through trade and record wealth including India, Russia, Vietnam, Mongolia, Tibet and Afghanistan --all except North Korea.

Nuclear bombs have no use unless you use them...and then your 'victory' will be very short lived.

Simple solution to Korean nuclear disarmament: buy each working nuclear device for $1 billion each. It is a lot cheaper than the death, devastation and cleanup of Seoul.

Not if they are having problems with the devices. All the tests were questionable in terms of actual results.

There were tests in 2006 and 2009. The yield of the former appears to fall inexplicably between less than one kiloton up to possibly 4 kilotons (only the Russians threw out a higher number). The 2009 test provoked widely varying estimates, like from 2 to 8 kilotons by most (exception again being the Russians, with a 10 to 20 kiloton range expressed).

You say "can" but so far the results don't follow the normal nuclear proliferating test results.

Such low yields are odd (if the Russians are wrong). Yields are normally in the 10 to 20 plus kiloton range (with Uranium gun assembly bombs being at the lower range, plutonium ones at the higher range).

What evidence can you cite that suggests they can set one off per annum? I ask that out of a sincere interest at learning of others' views.

Same old Korea story, year after year - look for something (like a glimmer of hope) hard enough and you'll find it, whether it's there or not. How much longer are we going to tolerate the Korean Lucy yanking that football out of the way, huh Charlie Browns?

Here's a novel soultion - why not let the North take over the South - serve them both right, wouldn't it?

1. Why would the South deserve to be taken over by the North? Care to elaborate?

2. Don't delude yourself for a moment into thinking that a relatively small American military presence of 20,000 men and women is the only thing that protects South Korea. South Korea maintains a military of 600,000 men and is one of the biggest buyers/developers of military equipments in the world - our military easily ranks as one of the ten most capable in the world.

While most South Koreans appreciate the American commitment to peace and security in the Korean peninsula, ill-informed "FXXK-YEAH-AMERICA" attitudes that fools such as yourself demonstrate does not help at all. The world knows that the US is in Asia to hedge against China's military rise.

"That’s not a diplomatic victory by their standards."
That is the wrong kind of attitude for international-diplomatic relationships. What is really a diplomatic victory? Maybe this new leader is the first in many to earnestly want to make the lives of his citizens better.